You can help empower voters with the information they need when heading to the ballot box. Join the Ballotpedia Society.

Wisconsin Question 1, Ban on Private and Non-Governmental Funding of Election Administration Amendment (April 2024)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Wisconsin Question 1
Flag of Wisconsin.png
Election date
April 2, 2024
Topic
Elections and campaigns
Status
Approveda Approved
Type
Constitutional amendment
Origin
State legislature

Wisconsin Question 1, the Prohibition on Non-Governmental Funding of Elections Amendment, was on the ballot in Wisconsin as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on April 2, 2024. It was approved.[1][2]

A "yes" vote supported this amendment to prohibit any level of government in the state from applying or accepting non-governmental funds or equipment for election administration.

A "no" vote opposed this amendment to prohibit any level of government in the state from applying or accepting non-governmental funds or equipment for election administration.


Election results

Wisconsin Question 1

Result Votes Percentage

Approved Yes

638,555 54.43%
No 534,612 45.57%
Results are officially certified.
Source


Overview

What did Question 1 do?

See also: Text of measure

Question 1 amended the Wisconsin Constitution to add a section to Article III to prohibit any level of government in the state from applying or accepting non-governmental funds or equipment for election administration. Question 1 was placed on the ballot with another amendment for the same section that provided that only election officials designated by law may administer elections. It was also approved.[2]

Do other states have similar prohibitions?

See also: Laws governing the private funding of elections

As of January 2024, 27 states had enacted laws banning or otherwise restricting the use of private donations for election administration purposes. Twenty-one of these states had a Republican trifecta when the law was adopted; the six other states had divided government at the time. No states banned or restricted private election funding prior to 2021.

In 2023, Louisiana voters approved the first state constitutional amendment designed to ban private or foreign election funding. The legislatively referred amendment was approved with 72.57% of the vote.

Who supported and opposed Question 1?

See also: Support and Opposition

Question 1 is a legislatively referred constitutional amendment. The vote to place Question 1 on the ballot was along party lines with Republicans in favor and Democrats opposed.

Question 1 received endorsements from Election Integrity for Wisconsin, Opportunity Solutions Project, Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, and Wisconsin Voter Alliance. Kyle Koenen, the policy director of the Wisconsin Institute for Liberty & Law, said, "In the interest of upholding fairness and safeguarding the integrity of our democratic process, it is essential to maintain a non-partisan electoral system that is free from external financial influences. The concerns that have been expressed regarding Mark Zuckerberg's extensive funding of election administration in Democratic-leaning communities closely parallel the worries that would emerge if a donor with right-leaning inclinations were to direct their resources exclusively toward Republican-leaning areas. AJR 77 and SJR 78 underscore the need to establish a clear standard: private funding should not have a role in the administration of Wisconsin's elections."[3]

Question 1 was opposed by All Voting is Local Action Wisconsin, Wisconsin Conservation Voters, and Wisconsin Democracy Campaign. Sam Liebert, state director of All Voting is Local Action Wisconsin, said, "These proposals, under the guise of protecting our elections, are nothing more than thinly veiled attempts to restrict voting rights and undermine the very foundations of our democratic system. It is our duty to stand firm in defending the rights and inclusivity of all eligible voters in our democracy."[4]

Text of measure

Ballot question

The ballot question for the amendment was as follows:[2]

Use of private funds in election administration. Shall section 7 (1) of Article III of the constitution be created to provide that private donations and grants may not be applied for, accepted, expended, or used in connection with the conduct of any primary, election, or referendum?[5]

Constitutional changes

See also: Article III, Wisconsin Constitution

The measure added section 7 of Article III to the state constitution. The following underlined text was added:[2]

Section 7 (1) No state agency or officer or employee in state government and no political subdivision of the state or officer or employee of a political subdivision may apply for, accept, expend, or use any moneys or equipment in connection with the conduct of any primary, election, or referendum if the moneys or equipment are donated or granted by an individual or nongovernmental entity.[5]

Full text

The full text can be read here.

Support

Supporters

Officials

Organizations

  • Election Integrity for Wisconsin
  • Opportunity Solutions Project
  • Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty
  • Wisconsin Voter Alliance

Arguments

  • Kyle Koenen, the policy director of the Wisconsin Institute for Liberty & Law: "In the interest of upholding fairness and safeguarding the integrity of our democratic process, it is essential to maintain a non-partisan electoral system that is free from external financial influences. The concerns that have been expressed regarding Mark Zuckerberg's extensive funding of election administration in Democratic-leaning communities closely parallel the worries that would emerge if a donor with right-leaning inclinations were to direct their resources exclusively toward Republican-leaning areas. AJR 77 and SJR 78 underscore the need to establish a clear standard: private funding should not have a role in the administration of Wisconsin's elections."
  • Madeline Malisa, visiting fellow at the Opportunity Solutions Project: "The funding of election operations, and where and how funds are being spent, are decisions that you—Wisconsin lawmakers—should make and not unaccountable special interest groups. Private funding of elections effectively allows private actors to influence who the winners and losers will be. These bills will safeguard Wisconsin elections from outside influence by prohibiting local governments from applying for, accepting, or spending any funding from private individuals or third parties for election administration. It will also allow only election officials to administer elections."


Opposition

Opponents

Organizations

  • ACLU of Wisconsin
  • All Voting is Local Action Wisconsin
  • League of Women Voters of Wisconsin
  • Wisconsin Conservation Voters
  • Wisconsin Democracy Campaign

Arguments

  • Kyle Johnson, political director for Black Leaders Organizing Communities (BLOC): "Without these funds, our elections will be under-resourced and the burden will fall on taxpayers. The bottom line is: grants and donations keep taxes low and elections accessible."
  • ACLU of Wisconsin: "Elections are underfunded. Local municipalities run Wisconsin's local, state, and federal elections on shoestring budgets. Grants banned by this proposal have provided a lifeline to help clerks pay for equipment, polling place rental, poll workers, and supplies to protect your right to vote and make elections run smoothly and securely."
  • Sam Liebert, state director of All Voting is Local Action Wisconsin: "These proposals, under the guise of protecting our elections, are nothing more than thinly veiled attempts to restrict voting rights and undermine the very foundations of our democratic system. It is our duty to stand firm in defending the rights and inclusivity of all eligible voters in our democracy."
  • Joan Schwarz, secretary of the League of Women Voters of Wisconsin: "Now is the time to be mindful that our Constitution not become the repository for a flurry of controversial, restrictive social policies with misleading and ambiguous language that the gerrymandered Legislature is proposing which, if passed, will be enshrined in our Constitution."


Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Wisconsin ballot measures

If you are aware of a committee registered to support or oppose this amendment, please email editor@ballotpedia.org.

Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions Cash Expenditures Total Expenditures
Support $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Oppose $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Background

Laws governing the private funding of elections

See also: Laws governing the private funding of elections

The private funding of elections refers to the practice of nonprofits, private organizations, or individuals providing funding or other resources to election administrators for the purpose of conducting or administering an election. Debate over using private resources for election costs began after donations from individuals, such as those made by Mark Zuckerburg, to nonprofits, including the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), ahead of the 2020 general election. These organizations subsequently made a series of donations and grants to election administrators.

At the time of the election, 27 states had enacted laws banning or otherwise restricting the use of private donations for election administration purposes. Twenty-one of these states had a Republican trifecta when the law was adopted; the six other states had divided government at the time. No states banned or restricted private election funding prior to 2021.

The map below shows the landscape of private funding laws as of March 2024, including all states that had enacted laws and those states' trifecta status at the time of enactment.

Mark Zuckerberg donations to Center for Tech and Civil Life (CTCL) and Center for Election Innovation and Research

In the run-up to the November 3, 2020, general election, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Dr. Priscilla Chan, donated $350 million to the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL). They also donated $50 million to the Center for Election Innovation and Research, saying the money was intended to help "election officials across the nation reach their voters with critical information about voter registration, mail voting, early voting, polling locations and hours, and the vote-counting process."[6]

These donations sparked debate about the propriety of non-governmental entities providing private funding for election administration efforts. In a Newsweek op-ed, the Brennan Center's Wendy Weiser and Jennifer Weiss-Wolf, said, "[The COVID-19] pandemic poses a national emergency impacting the very foundation of our democracy, and the Senate adjourned until Labor Day without giving states and local officials the funding they need to run safe and fair elections this fall. … We have reached an extraordinary point where we have no choice but to look to civil society—the business community and other private groups and organizations—to help fill the breach." Scott Walter, president of the Capital Research Center, said that CTCL staffers were former Democratic Party operatives whose goal was to improve Democrats' electoral prospects: "Can you imagine if the Charles Koch Foundation were to become involved with election officials? It would be front page news in The New York Times."[7][8] For more information about about CTCL grants given to local election officials in 2020, see this article.

Grants received by Wisconsin localities in 2020 by Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL)

According to the 990 tax form filed by the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), local jurisdictions in 38 of Wisconsin's 72 counties received over $10 million in grants from CTCL for the 2020 general election. The table below breaks down the grant amounts by county.[9]

Ballot measures related to private funding of election administration

See also: Louisiana Amendment 1 (2023) and Michigan Proposal 2 (2022)

In 2023, Louisiana voters approved the first state constitutional amendment designed to ban private or foreign election funding. The legislatively referred amendment was approved with 72.57% of the vote.

In 2022, Michigan voters approved a citizen-initiated constitutional amendment that allowed local governments to accept charitable and in-kind donations to assist with running elections as long as donations are disclosed and aren’t from foreign entities among other changes. It was approved with 59.99% of the vote.

Path to the ballot

See also: Amending the Wisconsin Constitution

In Wisconsin, the state legislature is required to approve an amendment by majority vote in two successive sessions for the amendment to appear on the ballot.

2021-2022 legislative session

The amendment was introduced as Senate Joint Resolution 101 (SJR 101). The Wisconsin State Senate approved the amendment by a vote of 21-11 with one not voting on February 22, 2022. The Wisconsin State Assembly approved SJR 101 by a vote of 58-32 with five not voting on February 24, 2022.[1]

Vote in the Wisconsin State Senate
February 22, 2022
Requirement: Simple majority vote of all members in each chamber in two sessions
Number of yes votes required: 17  Approveda
YesNoNot voting
Total21111
Total percent63.7%33.3%3.0%
Democrat0111
Republican2100

Vote in the Wisconsin House of Representatives
February 24, 2022
Requirement: Simple majority vote of all members in each chamber in two sessions
Number of yes votes required: 48  Approveda
YesNoNot voting
Total58325
Total percent61.0%33.7%5.3%
Democrat0324
Republican5801

2023-2024 legislative session

The amendment was introduced as Senate Joint Resolution 78 (SJR 78). The Wisconsin State Senate approved the amendment by a vote of 21-10 with two not voting on November 7, 2023. The Wisconsin State Assembly approved SJR 78 by a vote of 60-35 with four not voting on November 9, 2023. The resolution placed two separate questions on the April ballot related to election administration.[1]

Vote in the Wisconsin State Senate
November 7, 2023
Requirement: Simple majority vote of all members in each chamber in two sessions
Number of yes votes required: 17  Approveda
YesNoNot voting
Total21102
Total percent63.6%30.3%6.1%
Democrat0101
Republican2101

Vote in the Wisconsin House of Representatives
November 9, 2023
Requirement: Simple majority vote of all members in each chamber in two sessions
Number of yes votes required: 50  Approveda
YesNoNot voting
Total60354
Total percent60.6%35.4%4.0%
Democrat0350
Republican6004

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in Wisconsin

Click "Show" to learn more about current voter registration rules, identification requirements, and poll times in Wisconsin.

See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 Wisconsin State Legislature, "SJR 101," accessed January 5, 2023
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 Wisconsin State Legislature, "Text of SJR 101," accessed January 5, 2023
  3. Wisconsin State Legislature, "Testimony," accessed December 11, 2023
  4. All Voting is Local, "SET OF UNNECESSARY ELECTION AMENDMENTS PASSED BY WISCONSIN SENATE WILL CAUSE MORE BARRIERS TO THE BALLOT," November 7, 2023
  5. 5.0 5.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content
  6. Facebook, "Mark Zuckerberg: October 13, 2020," accessed March 23, 2021
  7. Newsweek, "Let the Private Sector Help Save the Election. We Have No Choice | Opinion," September 2, 2020
  8. Legal Newsline, "Center for Tech and Civic Life: Democratic election operatives masquerading as concerned voters’ group, critic says," August 24, 2020
  9. The Foundation for Government Accountability, "The Wisconsin “Zuckerbucks” Problem: New Data Reveals Private Funding of Election Offices Was More Widespread Than Initially Estimated," July 13, 2022
  10. Wisconsin Election Commission, “Election Day Voting,” accessed May 4, 2023
  11. 11.0 11.1 Wisconsin Elections Commission, "Voter Registration and Proof of Residence," accessed May 4, 2023
  12. 12.0 12.1 Wisconsin Elections Commission, "Photo ID," accessed May 4, 2023 Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "wvid" defined multiple times with different content
  13. 13.0 13.1 Wisconsin Department of Transportation, "Wisconsin ID card for voting purposes - petition process," accessed May 4, 2023